Stuka, focus on emotive fatalities can lead to unbalanced conclusions.
Historical risk, with known outcome and statistical probability is a measure of what happened, but more often not suitable for judging future risk requiring statistical inference. The future does not follow the past.
Past probability is not always suitable (e.g. 737 Max should not happen again).
Also, the outcome in future events is unknown, particularly fatalities - circumstance, aircraft size, passenger load, etc.
As in previous posts, there are very few if any actual '
catastrophic' (n.b. emotion) events after V1, but far more issues prior to takeoff.
A good comparison with this event is the CRJ overrun at Charleston - mis set flap, then config alert after the crew reselect during the takeoff. RTO after V1, saved by EMAS.
The outcome risk in each of the accidents appears similar, overrun mitigated by EMAS or 'mud'; but considering future risk - without mitigation, the difference between the steep drop off the end of 23 CRW, or more grass at KTM, would influence our judgement of 'risk' (likelihood of harm), … for an event which more likely is initiated before takeoff.
https://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/...n_WV_USA,_2010
https://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/KCRW
momoe; the problem with the much quoted "Children of the magenta line" is that it fails to explain how we achieve the awareness and then decide to '
click click'; aspects central to this incident.
Background reading 'Decisions under Uncertainty'
https://www.farnamstreetblog.com/201...r-uncertainty/
Follow the links to parts two and three:-
2 Two types of Ignorance; …
we live in a world where we are, to some extent, ignorant, then the best course is “thoughtful action or prudent information gathering.” Yet, when you look at the stories, “we frequently act in ways that violate such advice.”
3 Avoiding Ignorance; … our “
illusion of predictability.”
Also; a view of reality, situations and decision making are not clearcut, not black or white arguments.
Conditions for Intuitive Expertise 'A Failure to Disagree'
Under what conditions are the intuitions of professionals worthy of trust?
True experts, it is said, know when they don’t know. However, nonexperts (whether or not they think they are) certainly do not know when they don’t know.
http://www.hansfagt.dk/Kahneman_and_Klein(2009).pdf